|
|
Comments: 11 challenges facing 7 billion super-consumers
We offer two comment systems: our "Add a comment" system (no registration) and a social media system (registration with Disqus required). Either one will allow you to post a comment here.
Please note
- Inappropriate and "frivolous" (i.e. First!) comments may not be posted and spam will not be tolerated. "Trolling" attempts will be deleted.
- Comments are approved manually at the discretion of the mongabay.com administrator. Mongabay.com tries to approve comments on a timely basis, but in some cases, comments may take a few days to be approved.
- The comment system is not a way to communicate directly with the author of the article or the site administrator. Please contact the author for requests and corrections.
- Links (urls) are not active in posted comments.
Back to news.mongabay.com/2011/1030-hance_7billion.html
All comments
News index
|
|
|
There are a large number of 7 Billion articles out, I am happy to see, but this is most certainly the best I have read. Thanks for a job well done.
World Overpopulation Awareness
Thank you so much for an informative, very well written article on this exceptionally important topic. I think your closing sentence/thought sums it all up perfectly - it is just a pity that more people don't seem to care, or are happier living with their blinkers on, safe in their ignorance and not wanting to face reality!
Good article. Thanks for the focus on consumption. A world of 7 billion Quakers would have room for rain forests and lots of non human species, but a world of 7 billion who consume at the American rate will have space only for freeways, monoculture farms, and landfills.
An excellent article. I have posted it (Public) in Google+. What may be outside the scope of this article is that the vast majority of people will refuse to read it, once they figure out what it's about. People willfully ignore the consequences of environmental overexploitation. They do not wish to burden themselves with the guilt of inaction. Such people will vote against carbon taxes and other resource consumption fees and against more stringent environmental regulations. Many vote against family planning. And many essentially choose climate crisis by voting against nuclear energy.
Matt BD,
You make some good points, but why throw the red herring of nuclear energy in there? I would have thought that recent events in Japan would have sufficed to put an end to the idea that nuclear energy can be a solution to any of our problems.
Greenpeace and many others have convincingly demonstrated that nuclear energy is not the answer, and that there is nothing to prevent us moving from fossil to fuels to renewables. The only reason this hasn't already happened is because of the powerful vested interests who stand to make less profit.
Nuclear energy has been shown to be neither cost-effective nor practical. Then there is the minor detail of poisoning our planet with radioactive waste for thousands of years. Countries with sense - such as Germany - are abandoning nuclear energy as fast as they can, and investing in renewables. That's where the future is if there is to be one.